ArticleBMC genomics2025
On feature selection to disentangle cell type and state transcriptional programs.
Article in BMC genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patches: A Representation Learning Framework for Decoding Shared and Condition-Specific Transcriptional Programs in Wound Healing.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Single-cell omics approaches profile molecular constituents of individual cells. Replicated multi-condition experiments in particular aim at studying how the molecular makeup and composition of cell subpopulations changes at the sample-level. Two main approaches have been proposed for these tasks: firstly, cluster-based methods that group cells into (non-overlapping) subpopulations based on their molecular profiles and, secondly, cluster-free but neighborhood-based methods that identify (overlapping) groups of cells in consideration of cross-condition changes. In either approach, discrete cell groups are subjected to differential testing across conditions; and, a low-dimensional cell embedding, which is in turn derived from a subset of selected features, is required to delineate subpopulations or neighborhoods. We hypothesized that decoupling differences in cell type (i.e., between subpopulations) and cell state (i.e., between conditions) for feature selection would yield an embedding space that captures different aspects of cellular heterogeneity. And, that type-not-state embeddings would arrive at differential testing results that are more comparable between cluster- and neighborhood-based differential testing approaches. Our study leverages a simulation framework with competing type and state effects, as well as an experimental dataset, to evaluate a set of feature scoring and selection strategies, and to compare results from downstream differential analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.